The petitioner is a private limited company. One of its activities is to acquire properties and to develop them for real estate purposes. It purchased about 45 acres of land in various sub-divisions of Sy.No.103 of Shamshabad Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, through different sale deeds at various points of time from the respective owners. The petitioner approached the Sub-Registrar, Ranga Reddy District-2nd respondent herein with a request to furnish information as to the stamp duty, registration charges etc., for respective extents of lands proposed to be purchased by it. The 2nd respondent, however, refused to furnish particulars on the ground that as per the information received by him from the Tahsildar, Shamshabad Mandal, the land is ‘assigned’ in character and that has been since resumed to the Government. Obviously, he was trying to enforce the prohibition contained under Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short “the Act”) as amended by Act No.19 of 2007.

The petitioner contends that its vendors were granted Laoni pattas in respect of different extents of land on payment of consideration determined by the revenue authorities way back in the year 1952, and that there was no condition prohibiting the alienation of lands in question. According to the petitioner, neither the provisions contained under Section 22-A of the Act nor the ones under the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 would apply to such lands.

On behalf of the respondents, a counter affidavit and additional counter affidavit are filed. It is stated that the land to an extent of Ac.708.15 guntas, in Sy.No.103, is a Government land and on finding that some persons are unauthorisedly cultivating the land, an amount of Rs.630/-was levied towards Shivai-E-Jamabandhi. It is also stated that Laoni pattas were granted in the year 1968 in favour of about 70 individuals in respect of different extents of land in Sy.No.103.

It is further stated that the lands assigned were resumed to the Government by initiating proceedings under the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977,duly following the prescribed procedure and as of now, the lands are vested with the Government. They contend that the vendors of the petitioner were not entitled to transfer the lands in view of the restrictions placed under the relevant provisions of Laoni Rules.

Sri Vedula Venkataramana, learned Senior Counsel, submits that the prohibition under the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 or under Section 22-A of the Act would apply only when the assignment was in favour of the landless poor and the conditions prohibiting alienation were incorporated in the orders of the assignment. Learned Senior counsel further submits that in the instant case, pattas were granted under Laoni Rules, on payment of consideration and that no condition, prohibiting alienation of the lands was incorporated in the pattas. He further submits that even where the assignment of lands was made in favour of landless poor, the policy decision to impose conditions prohibiting alienation of such assigned lands was taken only in the year 1958 and since the assignments made in the instant case were much prior to that, the respondents are not entitled to enforce the prohibition retrospectively. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that it was only in respect of about Ac.11.18 guntas, in Sy.No. 103/43/A, 103/4A/AA and 103/50/A, that proceedings under the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977, were initiated and that the petitioner is pursuing the remedies available. It is urged that no proceedings were initiated against the lands, which are the subject matter of this writ petition.

Learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents submits that it is not in dispute that the lands were assigned in favour of the vendors of the petitioner and purchase of the assigned lands is prohibited under various provisions of law. He